Welcome to the Granick Slate Card for the June 8, 2010 California Primary Election. The hot national issues are Drill, Baby, Drill and Arizona checking the IDs of suspected non-Amuricans, in other words “illegal” people. Will we confront these issues in this election? Not so much. Primaries are really about picking our best candidate for the general election and punishing those incumbents who’ve done us wrong. I’m a registered Democrat, so my picks are for those races. Unfortunately, time is short so my explanations are terse, or non-existent, but as usual I have lots of links to other authorities if you want to check my math. So, without further ado, the picks.

STATE OFFICES
Governor (Dem): Jerry Brown

Lt. Governor (Dem): Gavin Newsom
I’m not a huge fan of Newsom’s anymore. I think he started strong and then got personally ambitious and distracted, leaving a lot of San Francisco’s needs on the table. Still, he’s an interesting and smart politician and I think the job of Lt. Governor requires ambition if one is to make anything of it.

Secretary of State: Debra Bowen (uncontested)

Controller: John Chiang (uncontested)

Attorney General: Chris Kelly
I’m friends with Chris Kelly, but that is not why I’m voting for him. I’m voting for him because the Attorney General is the law enforcement officer of the state. Who you pick tells you what laws will be most vigorously enforced. There are a lot of people in this state already who enforce the criminal laws, like every county District Attorney. But who enforces the consumer protection laws? If you look at the great Attorney Generals, they are people who were more than police, they had a well-rounded view of what law enforcement was supposed to mean. So over Harris or Delgadillo, your typical prosecutors, I prefer Kelly. Another point, while Harris has mad recidivism her big issue, she has also overseen one of the biggest scandals in San Francisco, unprecedented problems at San Francisco’s drug lab which has endangered hundreds of convictions. I’m not sure she’s ready for a promotion right now.

There are two contested races. For Seat 15, Dan Dean and Michael Nava are running against recently-appointed Judge Ulmer. They all seem to be good candidates, and there’s nothing wrong with Judge Ulmer. My feeling is that sitting judges should be kept absent some kind of malfeasance, but if you are not under a similar compunction, Dan Dean impressed me with his love for San Francisco and his experience as a Judge Pro Tem. Plus, one of his friends held my dog at the Safeway so I could run in and get some groceries. Talk about public service.

Seat 6 is open and there are four candidates. My choice is Harry Dorfman. Harry was my legal research and writing professor at Hastings and he is a good and decent man, which is something for me to say about a career prosecutor. He has spent a lot of time doing legal reform work internationally, which I’m confident has given him an even broader perspective than he already had when he was my teacher.

STATE PROPOSITIONS

Proposition 13. Yes

Limits on Property Tax Assessment. Seismic Retrofitting of Existing Buildings — State of California (Legislative Constitutional Amendment – Put on the Ballot by the Legislature – Majority Approval Required)
Should the California Constitution be amended to provide that all earthquake safety upgrades be exempt from property tax reassessment until the property is sold?
Proposition 14. No

Elections. Increases Right to Participate in Primary Elections — State of California(Legislative Constitutional Amendment – Put on the Ballot by the Legislature – Majority Approval Required)
Should the California Constitution be amended to require that all candidates for statewide or congressional office run in a single primary open to all registered voters, with only the top two vote-getters, regardless of their political party preference, advancing to the general election?
Proposition 15. Yes

California Fair Elections Act — State of California (Put on the Ballot by the Legislature – Majority Approval Required)
Should California lift the ban on public funding of political campaigns and establish public funding for Secretary of State candidates in the 2014 and 2018 elections?

Proposition 16. NO

Imposes New Two-Thirds Voter Approval Requirement for Local Public Electricity Providers — State of California (Initiative Constitutional Amendment – Put on the Ballot by Petition Signatures – Majority Approval Required)
Should the California Constitution be amended to require two-thirds voter approval before local governments can start up or expand electric service?

Proposition 17. NO

Allows Auto Insurance Companies to Base Their Prices in Part on a Driver’s History of Insurance Coverage — State of California (Initiative Statute – Put on the Ballot by Petition Signatures – Majority Approval Required)
Should insurance companies be permitted to reduce or increase the cost of auto insurance depending on whether a driver has a history of continuous insurance coverage?

Proposition D. Retirement Benefit Costs — San Francisco County (Charter Amendment – Majority Approval Required) YES
Shall the City: calculate retirement benefits for new City employees using average monthly compensation over two years instead of over one year; increase the retirement benefit employee contribution for new safety employees and new employees in positions covered by the State retirement system; and require that savings from reduced employer contributions to the City’s retirement system be deposited in the Retiree Health Care Trust Fund?
Proposition E. Budget Line Item for Police Department Security for City Officials and Dignitaries — San Francisco County (Ordinance – Majority Approval Required) No
Shall the City require that the Police Department’s annual budget include a line item for the cost of security provided to City officials and visiting dignitaries?
Proposition F. Renters’ Financial Hardship Applications — San Francisco County (Ordinance – Majority Approval Required) NO
Shall the City amend its Residential Rent Ordinance to add provisions for tenants to apply to the Rent Board to postpone most rent increases if they become unemployed, their wages decrease by 20% or more, or they do not receive a cost of living increase in their government benefits and those benefits are their sole income?
Proposition G. Transbay Transit Center — San Francisco County (declaration of policy – Majority Approval Required) YES

Shall it be City policy that the northern end of the planned San Francisco-to- Los Angeles high-speed rail line be located at the Transbay Transit Center at First and Mission streets?

To subscribe to the Granick Slate Card, visit http://
lists.granick.com/listinfo.cgi/slatecard-granick.com. The Granick
Slate Card issues before every California election and may be copied and freely shared for any non-commercial purpose, with author attribution. Derivative works need not make any attribution.
In my slate card, I mis-copied the SF Bay Guardian recommendations. In fact, the SFBG endorses a YES on all eight city props.
http://www.sfbg.com/2010/06/01/guardian-clean-slate
http://www.sfbg.com/2010/04/27/endorsements-san-francisco-ballot-measures

Vote early, vote often,

Jennifer

To subscribe to the Granick Slate Card, visit http://
lists.granick.com/listinfo.cgi/slatecard-granick.com. The Granick
Slate Card issues before every California election and may be copied and freely shared for any non-commercial purpose, with author attribution. Derivative works need not make any attribution.